Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

There seems to be some debate over "the weight of attack." My arm weighs around 15 pounds. I can lift and drop all 15 pounds of arm weight drop freely using gravity or I can hold back and regulate the weight drop anywhere ranging from 40 grams all the way back up to 15 pounds. Of course velocity is the other important factor that works in conjunction with arm dropping.

Whatever you might say and imagine, I'll bet that you don't do this in normal playing practice. If you did, imagine the huge amount of (wasted) work you would put into preventing weight falling. Dropping weight as a piano technique is a chimera - it doesn't really happen and techniques based on it waste a lot of time before settling down into something quite different. This doesn't prevent a lot of people from going through life imagining it and teaching it, though.

lol you are so silly, rintincop. Drumour is on the right track here. SIT on your keyboard, depressing the keys slowly. You will notice that no sound is made. This proves that it is the speed of articulation that creates sound, NOT the weight deposited on the keyboard. You may lack the strength to depress keys quickly without weight. Therefore, you use weight to compensate for your lack of strength. Using weight to compensate for lack of proper technique causes many, many problems in people's playing.

i read Bernstein's book on the subject and he thinks that so called 'dead drop' or purely gravity drop is faulty technique and even those who advocate it didn't actually do exactly as they thought when playing. the point is that no matter what you use in your playing, fingers, hands or arms or body, with weight or not, they're all controlled to achieve the sound, and nothing is just 'dead', or free or uncontrolled drop.

Vertical weight is the sworn enemy of building great technique. rintincop: Your piano couldn't care less how much your arm weighs. It isn't a bathroom scale. The speed of the hammer is affected by TWO variables:SPEED and ACCELERATION of the depression of the key. The amount of weight deposited on the keyboard is NOT one of these variables. The speed of your arm dropping into the key is in fact MUCH slower than the speed that can be achieved, with proper training, by the fingertip.

Originally posted by Mr_Kitty: Vertical weight is the sworn enemy of building great technique. rintincop: Your piano couldn't care less how much your arm weighs. It isn't a bathroom scale. The speed of the hammer is affected by TWO variables:SPEED and ACCELERATION of the depression of the key. The amount of weight deposited on the keyboard is NOT one of these variables. The speed of your arm dropping into the key is in fact MUCH slower than the speed that can be achieved, with proper training, by the fingertip. [/b]

I agree with most of what you're saying, but the amount of weight behind a finger's keystrike affects the quality of sound...especially on a good piano. You can achieve a rounder tone using the weight of your arms.

NB, I'm not saying that a "rounder" tone is necessarily better in every case, but there are applications where it is presciptive. The opening and closing of Rachmaninov opus 3 no 2 comes immediately to mind.

A grand piano is an incredibly sensitive instrument and a pianist can exert a lot of control over the manner in which the hammer strikes the strings.

I couldn't begin to explain the physics behind it, but you can hear it. Try this exercise on a grand piano.

Play any 4 note chord FF as you ordinarily would. Play the same chord aiming for the same volume, but lower your wrist and allow more of your arm/body weight through to the keys. Try this a few times, varying the height of your wrist. The higher your wrist is, the brighter the tone. The lower your wrist is, the mellower the tone.

The level of your wrist controls the amount of arm weight that's transferred through to the keys -it acts as a fulcrum. I can certainly hear a difference in sound quality depending on the position of the wrist.

Originally posted by Mr_Kitty:The speed of your arm dropping into the key is in fact MUCH slower than the speed that can be achieved, with proper training, by the fingertip. [/b]

Perhaps if one thinks of the arm alone. But I think of the arm to wrist to finger as one long whip. The higher I start, the bigger the whiplike effect and the faster the acceleration (the wrist providing the swing and the arm gravity drop initiating the force). So I don't really look at this as a fingertip thing -- at least the way I play. My fingers are very strong though from supporting the impact from a fast whip.

I was taught using relaxation/arm gravity drop but as I analyzed it, I just understood the forces at work a little better. So often times we're all talking about the same thing but the description of absolutes (only arm or only fingers) are often incomplete.

Originally posted by rintincop: There seems to be some debate over "the weight of attack." My arm weighs around 15 pounds. I can lift and drop all 15 pounds of arm weight drop freely using gravity or I can hold back and regulate the weight drop anywhere ranging from 40 grams all the way back up to 15 pounds. Of course velocity is the other important factor that works in conjunction with arm dropping.

Discuss. [/b]

Well, going by the Taubman approach to technique, there is something in having "weight" in the keys, but its weight in a different way. The whole idea behind the Taubman definition of "weight" is just having your arm loose, because when your arm is tight and restricted it inhibits technique (going by the idea that your arm feels heavier when its relaxed and feels lighter when its tight). So i think that this definition of weight is different than the way you are using it.

I googled it up. Galileo dropped a ten pound weight and a one pound weight from the Leaning Tower of Pisa, and determined that they both accelerated at the same rate.

Point being for this discussion: they accelerated as they dropped. So the amount of weight is pretty much immaterial, as two pounds of arm weight is plenty to depress a key. You certainly don't need fifteen pounds. But that they do accelerate by gravitational force seems very significant here.

Tomasino

_________________________
"Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do so with all thy might." Ecclesiastes 9:10

Your arm accelerates because of gravity, but the force transferred through your arm to the keys is a combination of the velocity and mass of your arm.

F=ma. (force=mass x acceleration)

So in response to Tomasino:while a ten pound weight and one pound weight will both achieve the same velocity if dropped from the same height, the force of the ten pound weight on impact will be greater than the force of the one pound weight.

This is assuming total freefall (ie complete relaxation in which the arms falls like a lifeless weight).

That's my physics lesson, I offer no explanation as to how it affects a "rounder tone". Although all 3 of my previous teachers complained bitterly about my tone and tried to fix it. I have trouble hearing it, but at times I have.

Either tone is one big conspiracy contrived by some crazy elite pianist group, or some of us simply aren't at the point where we completely listen to the tone. Sometimes I get the feeling that I'm listening only to pitch and volume and I'm not aware of that other dimension of the sound.

Simple physics. Gravity acceleration is 32 feet per second squared, regardless of weight. The higher the height, the faster the speed on impact.

Also simple physics, adding FORCE (i.e. pushing down from the shoulders to arms, WILL add to acceleration since this is going past regular gravity, thus adding to the equation above.

So to hit with more speed on the keys, one may either press the arms down, or just start from a higher height. Presumably this force is transmitted in the hammer throwing.

Now going back to arms, I'm going to make a reasonable guess that the longer arm extended to the fingers (being a longer fulcrum and larger power source, i.e. larger muscles), will have more potential for a higher force, with less effort, than the little finger.

But the little finger though has better ability to accelerate quicker with less effort which explains its ability for finer control.

This all translates to me, at least, that you need all the parts and they contribute to the whole equation.

Now tone is a more interesting thing. My understanding is that when a hammer hits the string at a certain level of force (and also location), the vibrations of the strings create a mix between fundamental tones and partials (overtones). What is perceived to be bad tone is too many partials. A dominant fundamental is the more attractive sound. So controlling the force of hammer throwing affects how it sounds. Hence the expression "good tone".

When designing pianos, the manufacturer is conscious of controlling all the parts so that the best tone is created most of the time. One's playing, unfortunately, can override this effort. This is what my teacher used to tell me before as my "banging the piano"

Originally posted by Brooklyn Pianist:Play any 4 note chord FF as you ordinarily would. Play the same chord aiming for the same volume, but lower your wrist and allow more of your arm/body weight through to the keys. Try this a few times, varying the height of your wrist. The higher your wrist is, the brighter the tone. The lower your wrist is, the mellower the tone.

The level of your wrist controls the amount of arm weight that's transferred through to the keys -it acts as a fulcrum. I can certainly hear a difference in sound quality depending on the position of the wrist. [/b]

This is not as mad as it sounds (but physics doesn't enter into it). It is kinda the crux of the matter. When playing chords the balance of each note is effected by how you use your arm/hand/fingers. That creates a different tone and separates the men.... This CANNOT be done on a single note.

I don't think pianists who achieve good tone think about the physics. Actually, I'm almost certain no one thinks about that while playing. It seems ridiculous, we are not machines lol.

Arm weight has a lot to do with it of course and applying physics doesn't make much sense. Unfortunately, many pianists can't tell the difference between good tone and bad tone. They only hear the right note or wrong note, which imo is due to a lack of "ear". Most pianist don't really "listen" to what they are playing, and that is actually the hardest part. What you are hearing when you play is not always what you may imagine it to sound like.

I say leave the physics to the mathematicians and let us musicians depend on our aural skills and depth of musicality to achieve good tone. None of this should be calculated in a mechanical sense.

My 2cents.

_________________________
"Simplicity is the final achievement." - Chopin

Originally posted by keyboardklutz: Yes, but there are pianists out there who not only think they can alter the tone of an individual notes BUT TEACH WAYS OF DOING SO. Sadly Tobias Matthay was one. [/b]

Say the pianists who do teach ways of altering tone were tested: If their backs were turned to a piano and different notes were played and they could here a difference in the sound and they chose to call that a change in tone, wouldn't that make everything you are saying wrong?

(btw i have already done this very thing in the past and people who do advocate changing tone can hear a difference between a "tense sound" and a "relaxed sound")

Their research shows that musicians do hear something different depending on touch, though these differences cannot be heard when the musicians can't hear the type of touch used; however, if musicians are hearing the difference and choose to call this difference a change in tone then that is completely alright.

Originally posted by keyboardklutz: Yes, but there are pianists out there who not only think they can alter the tone of an individual notes BUT TEACH WAYS OF DOING SO. Sadly Tobias Matthay was one. [/b]

Also, since evidence shows that many musicians are able to discern a difference in the touch the pianist uses, that means that the people teaching ways of altering the tone are legitimately teaching things that others are capable of hearing. Not so sad anymore, is it?

Originally posted by keyboardklutz: If you are able to change the tone of an individual note. You have discovered a force unknown to mankind. [/b]

Again, i am saying that you are not changing the actual tone of the note, but the sound of the finger striking the key creates the illusion that there is a change in the tone.

If you actually took a look at my evidence, done by physicists (note that I have discovered nothing), you would see that half of the tested musicians could tell whether a single note was pressed or struck. Again, if musicians choose to call this difference a change in tone, then it is fine to do so.

Hmmm, i think we may have varying definitions of the word "tone". If by tone you mean frequency of the pitch, then yes, we can agree that the frequency is not going to change at all, though the amplitude might. When i say tone, i am talking about the character of the sound or pitch. Take a look at the graphs by 2.2 in that paper showing the difference in amplitude between a struck key and a pressed key. I am saying that the character of the sound (tone) is perceived to be different just because of the sound of the finger hitting the key (the little lines shown before the actual frequency of the pitch is shown on the "RB struck" graph).

So, Klutz, are you saying that you can't tell the difference between a key being struck with a straight finger pointed down, sunk into, or gripped, just because all that is happening is the hammer is striking the string?

_________________________
Pianist and teacher with a 5'8" Baldwin R and Clavi CLP-230 at home.

Originally posted by keyboardklutz: The sound of the finger hitting the key is just that. And, as you say, happens before the tone. [/b]

Well, i am saying that the sound of the finger hitting the key happens before the pitch is heard, but the sound of the finger hitting the key combined with the sound of the pitch create the character or quality of the pitch, or "tone".

They can call it what they like. Your study was a very narrow one - can a struck key be differentiated from a pressed one. It is obvious from the study that if you listen for the strike you can tell the difference. The study comes to no other conclusion.

Musicians were asked to identify the type of touch of the recorded samples, in a first block with all attack noises before the tone onsets included, in a second block without them. Half of the listeners could correctly identify significantly more tones than chance in the first block (up to 86% accuracy), but no one in block 2.

The musicians had to 'identify' the type of touch - not describe what it sounded like. Can you not see how you are extrapolating things from this study that just aren't there? I too have had enough tonight.

wow some of you guys are really misinformed about playing the piano. That's okay. Great pianists control the sound through variations in the speed of their fingertips. The fingertip moving a distance of 10mm can be trained to move much faster and with far more control than the arm dropping from any height short of an aeroplane at 36000 feet. You guys drop your arms because it's EASIER since you've never been shown the proper way to slowly build up strength. Once the strength is there, words cannot even describe the ease of playing. Dropping weight will make you sound like a bull in a china shop.

I know some great pianists and they knew great pianists or were taught by great pianists. They use arm weight (in addition to everything else). Should I tell those who are not yet dead that they don't know how to play?

I concede its probably not the only way to play piano, but let's not say they are misinformed. If it works for you, that's great. But my personal preference is to use everything from my arms to my fingers.

Originally posted by Mr_Kitty: wow some of you guys are really misinformed about playing the piano. That's okay. Great pianists control the sound through variations in the speed of their fingertips. The fingertip moving a distance of 10mm can be trained to move much faster and with far more control than the arm dropping from any height short of an aeroplane at 36000 feet. You guys drop your arms because it's EASIER since you've never been shown the proper way to slowly build up strength. Once the strength is there, words cannot even describe the ease of playing. Dropping weight will make you sound like a bull in a china shop. [/b]

thankyou for this post. A lot of misinformed members here! I think neither of you have experienced or were taught how to achieve good tone on the piano. It is something that can not be explained, but only heard and experienced. Using one's arm weight the correct way not only can achieve good sound, it also is much less strenuous on the the body physically. If you feel tension or muscles tightening in your arm or hand, your most likely not doing it right.

By the way, lets clear something up. The words "tone" and "sound" are used in piano playing to describe the quality of what is being heard and not the actual "pitch". Since it is impossible to alter intonation on one note with out messing with the strings, this should be obvious (but apparently it is not).

_________________________
"Simplicity is the final achievement." - Chopin

PassionatePianist-did you say I was never taught how to achieve good tone on the piano? Did I read that correctly?

I too know many great pianists who play using arm weight. They playing will never be as efficient. They will always have to work much harder to create a dynamic pallete which is not as extensive. Ultimately how you play is up to you. I'm just telling you how Horowitz, Michelangeli, and Rubinstein played.

For the most part, differentiation of tone comes down to volumetrics, which is the result of velocity and mass, whether it's controlled in the fingertips, or in the drop of the forearm.

For tone to be understood musically, it must be in a musical context. An individual note does not provide a context. A chord, or a phrase does. It is the relative volume of each note within the chord, the phrase, or both combined, that produces the illusion of different tones.

But I started this post with the phrase "for the most part," because there is one exception, and that is the character of the felt hammer in conjunction with the velocity and mass of the hammer as it hits the string.

The effective character of the hammer changes with velocity as it hits the string. As I understand it, piano manufacturers increase the density and the compacted hardness of the felt towards the center of the hammer. With more and more velocity, the harder center of the hammer comes into play, resulting in a tone not only louder, but with a brightness, an edge, or a ping, or a pang--or some word like that.

Another facet of tone differentiation, or the illusion thereof, that has not been mentioned yet, is how the note is dampened. A slow release of the pedal, or the key, as opposed to an abrupt release, seems to produce a different kind of tone--an illusion to be sure, but a real illusion to be sure, too. I compare it to wine tasting, where the "finish" of the wine seems to alter the taste as the wine first touched the tongue.

Tomasino

_________________________
"Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do so with all thy might." Ecclesiastes 9:10

What on earth do physics have to do with sound waves being generated from resonant wood in contact with metal strings being struck by hammers in a mechanical device from keys being physically depressed by the appendages of an biological organism?

Seriously, I think it is a bit daft to think that anything but physics could be responsible for generating the sound waves. But certainly psychology and the illusions of mind that make us even believe we are conscious are responsible for how we perceive sound and thus quality of tone.

I know, for example, in my case, I am capable of imagining a wide palette of tone quality coming through action of my fingers on the piano keyboard -- whether or not others listening hear it and whether or not the differences actually do exist. Why this morning I imagined playing Mozart like Maria Joao Pires and found the effect most pleasing. Perhaps if I were to spend less time imagining and more time actually listening closely to what and how I am playing I could close the gap between what I am hearing and what my audience is hearing?

On the other hand, as a listener at concerts of Lang Lang or even Evgeny Kissin I do perceive that the tone produced is different depending on whether or not I can see them and their hands while playing.

Here is an interesting exchange on the subject with no less than Charles Rosen:

Originally posted by tomasino:...It is the relative volume of each note within the chord, the phrase, or both combined, that produces the illusion of different tones.

... but a real illusion to be sure, too. I compare it to wine tasting, where the "finish" of the wine seems to alter the taste as the wine first touched the tongue.

Tomasino [/b]

Firstly such sense, and then - a real illusion? All sorts of things go on in the brain. What can't happen is the end of a sound PHYSICALLY affecting the beginning. Unless we're changing our notion of time.

Originally posted by rintincop: There seems to be some debate over "the weight of attack." My arm weighs around 15 pounds. I can lift and drop all 15 pounds of arm weight drop freely using gravity or I can hold back and regulate the weight drop anywhere ranging from 40 grams all the way back up to 15 pounds. Of course velocity is the other important factor that works in conjunction with arm dropping.

Discuss. [/b]

For those who have forgotten the topic.

It does not say 'In my mind' or 'I have the illusion' or even I 'feel' or 'experience'. Another thread on the subjective experience would obviously be of great interest - or at least members could state they are referring to some mental phenomenon to clear up any confusion.

Well, kbk, although I agree with most of what you typed so far, the original topic quoted above doesn't say anything much really. It doesn't mention sound, for example, let alone tone. It does say discuss, not make statements without listening or trying to understand each other, which is in my opinion not completely successful yet.

My take so far on the discussion is that the pianist can do nothing to very little to alter the sound of individual notes on the piano, despite the displeasure I experience when hearing someone 'bang away'. Or to put it another way, you can make the raw piano sound worse (increase noise), but not better.

Nevertheless, it is how we physically 'dance' at the keyboard in connecting notes, in creating musical lines, in timing, in voicing chords, together with the rest of the a la minute musical decisions we make that influences how listeners subjectively perceive the quality of sound or the so-called piano tone. Being a good pianist is being a good illusionist whether intellectually or intuitively. It means exploiting psychological deficits in perception within the listener's mind to create an experience which in effect only can exist in the listener's mind.

Since piano playing is too complex and vast of a task to carry out completely consciously, pianists need shorthand methods from the conscious mind to direct their unconscious activities. Visualisation, thinking in terms of arm weight, or flopping or rotating wrists, you name it are all ways for the pianist to delude him or herself and the unconscious to integrate movements in a way that makes a better subjective musical experience.

Are you suggesting we limit the discussion only to a discussion of varying degrees of weight and the relative physical merits of so called arm dropping?

My take so far on the discussion is that the pianist can do nothing to very little to alter the sound of individual notes on the piano

I must disagree with the 'to very little' part of your post. The rest nicely written, informative and I agree with it all. The world of music is 99% (or more) subjective. It's just that there have been so many cross wires on this thread, I think, for clarity's sake, we need to know whether posters are describing what is going on in their heads or what is happening 'out there'.

Butting in sorry . . . . Some notes seem to have a nicer tone, simply because of a part they play in a melody, and also, if you delay playing a note by a fraction of a second, that note can seem extremely beautiful, but only if not over-used and used in the wrong places.

_________________________
Patience's the best teacher, and time the best critic. - F.F.Chopin

Quoting myself, TOMASINO, above: " . . . Another facet of tone differentiation, or the illusion thereof, that has not been mentioned yet, is how the note is dampened. A slow release of the pedal, or the key, as opposed to an abrupt release, seems to produce a different kind of tone--an illusion to be sure, but a real illusion to be sure, too. I compare it to wine tasting, where the "finish" of the wine seems to alter the taste as the wine first touched the tongue . . . "

Quoting KEYBOARDKLUTZ: " . . . a real illusion? All sorts of things go on in the brain. What can't happen is the end of a sound PHYSICALLY affecting the beginning . . . "

You and I agree on this totally Keyboardklutz. I was writing about an illusion that happens inside the mind, probably involving brain chemistry and synaptic connections only vaguely understood by scientists. It seems proper to call the illusion "real" in that sense. I was not writing about physics in that part of my post.

I should have made the distinction clearer.

Tomasino

_________________________
"Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do so with all thy might." Ecclesiastes 9:10

TheJourney-Yes, as a matter of fact, I AM based in reality. I am what you might call a "reality based pianist". Where are you based in... some bizarre fantasy land where physics has nothing to do with sound?

I never got past grade 11 physics in high school. But even that is enough to know that the laws of physics govern most everything. Even something as artsy as the piano and the sounds that it can produce.

Originally posted by Mr_Kitty: TheJourney-Yes, as a matter of fact, I AM based in reality. I am what you might call a "reality based pianist". Where are you based in... some bizarre fantasy land where physics has nothing to do with sound?

I never got past grade 11 physics in high school. But even that is enough to know that the laws of physics govern most everything. Even something as artsy as the piano and the sounds that it can produce. [/b]

Hiya MrK, my comment was actually addressed to keyboardklutz, sorry for any confusion! too bad there is not an IRONY font we can switch on and off...

I think you have had as much formal schooling in physics as many of us here. However, I don't have as much faith as you do in the ability of physics to explain everything. Using physics to describe psychology or neuroscience is a bit too deconstructionist and round-a-bout for my taste. You would have to create your own custom made formal systems to get from physics to consciousness instead of standing on the shoulders of existing disciplines.

Actually, the thing I most like about physicists is how they keep discovering how little they know and keep changing their world view. I would bet that if you put three physicists in a room with a grand piano and handed them this thread that they wouldn't be in as much in agreement as keyboardklutz would have us believe...

Personally I think physics has everything to do with sound wave production but less to do (directly) with what we understand colloquially as hearing and with subjective judgments of sound perceptions & certainly with such nebulous concepts as pianist-touch-influenced piano tone quality... How about you? How about your girlfriend's Dad, any news on that front?

Are you suggesting we limit the discussion only to a discussion of varying degrees of weight and the relative physical merits of so called arm dropping?

Yes or - qualify your posts. [/b]

One problem causing difficulties for discussion in this thread is that most of us are not aware exactly what we are doing at the keyboard. We think we are doing one thing, but are doing another. We hear with our eyes and see with our fingers. We vary tension yet don't know how much tension we actually carry. We drop our arm weight, yet don't.

When it comes to judging piano tone quality, we may think that the indirect stroke caused by for example "a perfectly flop-rotated wrist combined with arm weight attack and squiggly be-bung reminiscing finger movement after touch" are the reason, when in fact our (listeners') perception of piano tone quality may in fact be influenced sub-consciously by factors we poorly appreciate or understand such as the way we connect the notes, or bring out inner voices in succcessive chords or micro variations in timing.

This is the reason most studies done on the physical side of player-induced tone production use mechanical devices such as pendulums to apply a known and consistent force. It is why they use graphs to view any concrete changes in frequency, amplitude, sustain, etc. However, even these studies are not conclusive as to the impact of player touch.

As long as we want to discuss physical effects, yet are faced with unknown, unmeasured, subjective inputs resulting in unmeasured, subjective, individually perceived outputs, the physics of individual note productions in between get lost and miss relevance.

Originally posted by hopinmad: Butting in sorry . . . . Some notes seem to have a nicer tone, simply because of a part they play in a melody, and also, if you delay playing a note by a fraction of a second, that note can seem extremely beautiful, but only if not over-used and used in the wrong places. [/b]

Yes. Certainly. These perceptions are familiar.

How do you see this in relation to the original topic of varying arm weight? Can the way you depress the key cause the action of the piano to create a different sound other than in amplitude (loud / soft) irrespective of the timing chosen?

Originally posted by hopinmad: No I don't believe so, but one might imagine it does so, which sounds silly but I'm sure it's perfectly true. [/b]

:) This reminds me of one of the master classes being held by Daniel Barenboim who exhorted Lang Lang to "create a crescendo on one note".

I think we all would agree on this thread that physics and piano design all conspire against this being a possibility. But the suggestion of a crescendo in the listener's ear? That is another matter altogether. Enter the pianist as illusionist.

We all know the piano cannot crescendo on one note. However, a skillful pianist can create the illusion of a crescendo using the power of suggestion. In the same way many pianists "vibrate" on a single note. Placebo effect is powerful stuff. I realize that any physicist would deny any possibility of the one-note crescendo. I have done blind tests on many of my friends. They turn to face the other way, close their eyes, and I play a note the "regular" way, then I play it using the "crescendo" technique, and vice versa. People tend to hear the difference 75% of the time.

This thread is supposed to be about using weight. Let's get back on topic.

Originally posted by Mr_Kitty: jazzwee-why not just play with your head, shoulders, knees AND toes?

PassionatePianist-did you say I was never taught how to achieve good tone on the piano? Did I read that correctly?

I too know many great pianists who play using arm weight. They playing will never be as efficient. They will always have to work much harder to create a dynamic pallete which is not as extensive. Ultimately how you play is up to you. I'm just telling you how Horowitz, Michelangeli, and Rubinstein played.

Cheers! [/b]

No, I was not directing that at you Mr. Kitty.

Interesting thread...carry on..

_________________________
"Simplicity is the final achievement." - Chopin

Originally posted by Mr_Kitty: We all know the piano cannot crescendo on one note. However, a skillful pianist can create the illusion of a crescendo using the power of suggestion. In the same way many pianists "vibrate" on a single note. Placebo effect is powerful stuff. I realize that any physicist would deny any possibility of the one-note crescendo. I have done blind tests on many of my friends. They turn to face the other way, close their eyes, and I play a note the "regular" way, then I play it using the "crescendo" technique, and vice versa. People tend to hear the difference 75% of the time.

This thread is supposed to be about using weight. Let's get back on topic. [/b]

This topic is very complex, and numerous similar dicussions about the influnence of touch on sound has been held during the years.

Did anyone mention psycho-physical feed back from your arm and finger, creating the illusion of rounder, softer, or harder tone?

And that you tend to hear what you want to hear?

The only evidence of touch influencing sound are experiments where a listener that does not see the pianist still notices the differences.

And then the pianist should not play any piece, but merely hit single notes - with and wihout using the sustain. Musical preformance will include too many onterferring factors like balance, melody emphasis etc.

The results must be statistically significant, with more than one listener involved.

I am not biased or think the phenomenon of 'tone' doesn't exist. I have heard 12 pianists all play their own composition on the same piano, one after each other. What was interesting was that only two had a 'nice tone'. The others sounded like they were playing from inside a tin can (i.e. there are huge differences in 'tone'). But NONE BROKE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS.

Originally posted by keyboardklutz: I am not biased or think the phenomenon of 'tone' doesn't exist. I have heard 12 pianists all play their own composition on the same piano, one after each other. What was interesting was that only two had a 'nice tone'. The others sounded like they were playing from inside a tin can (i.e. there are huge differences in 'tone'). But NONE BROKE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS. [/b]

I don't know if to respond "that's great!" or "who cares?". Knowing whether or not they 'broke' any laws of physics is less important than understanding if and how they were able to exploit any laws of physics in their quest to reward you with an experience of 'nice tone'. If not we can ignore physics and move on to something with more explanatory power.

Your post raises more questions than it answers:- What do you mean by a nice tone?- Was there a correlation between players exhibiting 'nice tone' and those demonstrating 'sensitive musicianship"?- How do you explain the differences you witnessed between nice and not so nice tone in terms of sound and in terms of the physical manipulations observed or claimed by the players (both "visible and invisible", to quote a compatriot of yours long deceased)?- How would you as a teacher help the other ten to obtain a nice tone?- Does this have anything to do with arm weight?

They (the two) played as 'a compatriot of mine long deceased' would have observed and taught. I would teach the ten what 'a compatriot of mine long deceased' would have taught them. Accept, sadly, the bit where he believed he could break the laws of physics.

When the key was played in a percussive manner by the pianist, the hammer was sharply accelerated at the beginning of its flight and then continued under its own momentum. In the non-percussive case, the hammer was accelerated continuously throughout its flight until its final release. It seems reasonable to assume that the percussive case generates much more vibration of hammer-and-arm than the non-percussive and, in consequence, much more prompt sound and less after sound.

This is practically what Tobias Matthay said and is just as wrong now as then. The writer makes it clear it is only a theory (and I think a poor one).

Interestingly I pulled out Matthay's last word on the topic and after a life time of erroneous view seems to modify his stance

Quote:

It does not matter whether you call the result a better quality [his italics] of tone, or merely a better controlled tone. - Epitome

The point being (and made by Otto Ortmann) that you lose control of the hammer (and therefore it's dynamic (call it tone if you like)) unless you start from the key surface and accelerate as you depress.

For those that are interested here's another 'take' on 'tone' from The Piano Quarterly Fall 1979:

Quote:

In other words, the piano is a doubly percussive instrument. Not only is there the percussion of the hammer against the strings, where the speed of the hammer determines the basic tone "color," but as well the percussion of the key upon the keybed, where the energy level of the impact determines the tone "value."

Originally posted by keyboardklutz: They (the two) played as 'a compatriot of mine long deceased' would have observed and taught. I would teach the ten what 'a compatriot of mine long deceased' would have taught them. Accept, sadly, the bit where he believed he could break the laws of physics. [/b]

With all due respect, I do understand the rhetorical technique to keep repeating a trite phrase such as "break the laws of physics". This way of communicating is used ad nauseum by both Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair, was often employed in old Soviet era propaganda films and can be heard today on school playgrounds. However, in my opinion, it doesn't lend itself to any kind of reasonable discussion.

The exhortation of the OP to "discuss" is a wise one. Preferably with specifics and arguments that can be supported by facts.

If the mutual objective is one of discussion, your last posts leave me with a number of questions:

- What do you mean by break the laws of physics? - What observations can you share of those who believe that they are violating the laws of physics while playing?- What do you mean by a nice tone?- Was there a correlation between players exhibiting 'nice tone' and those demonstrating 'sensitive musicianship"?- How do you explain (specifically) the differences you witnessed between nice and not so nice tone in terms of sound and in terms of the physical manipulations observed or claimed by the players (both "visible and invisible", to quote a compatriot of yours long deceased)?- How would you as a teacher help the other ten to obtain a nice tone?- Does this have anything to do with arm weight?

I hope your not asking for an essay re: your questions. I'd have thought reference to Matthay answers most of them.

On the matter of physics - those who think they can alter the 'tone' (but keep the same dynamic) of a note are either in ignorance of the laws of physics OR claiming said laws do not apply to themselves.